Not All Soldiers & Vets Take Anti-War Protests Personally
Some people would have you believe that all of the soldiers oversees are glad to be there and see the Iraq War as a noble mission. Some people would have you believe that all of the soldiers are personally insulted by war protestors. Some people would have you believe that you cannot support your troops and be against the war in Iraq at the same time.
I don’t believe that’s true. I’m of the opinion that the soldiers in the military have their own minds and their own opinions despite the fact that the military tries to train that out of them early on. 
My friend D, who’s a military lawyer and an officer, who’s been told he could ship out for active duty in Iraq any day, has indicated to me that he doesn’t have this hive thinking. He thinks this is the wrong war and the wrong time. He’s not the only one I’ve talked to either. He’s not the only one who’s voicing his opinion either.
I think there are just as many soldiers both here in the states and overseas in Iraq who have mixed feelings about the whole thing as there are civilians. I think there are just as many soldiers as civilians who have questions that the administration won’t answer. I think we’re all in the same boat.
And I don’t believe that soldiers today are affected the same way by anti-war protests as they were in Vietnam. For the most part, most of those protesting don’t hate the military. They seem to be interested in bringing our soldiers home safely and alive and all in one piece. We’ve learned from the Vietnam experience. We’ve come of age. Well, some of us anyway.
The following is from a transcript of an interview with First Sergeant Perry Jefferies, a 20 year veteran, who served in Iraq before retiring last year:
BRANCACCIO: What do you make of [Cindy Sheehan’s vigil]?
PERRY JEFFERIES: I think it’s pretty interesting. I like the fact that she’s putting stress on the system. Asking for an answer to a question that has not been asked enough yet. There’s a lot of people out there. I don’t know that they’re all germane to that situation. But I don’t think it’s bad that they’re being allowed to express their opinions.
BRANCACCIO: Do you consider yourself a– I don’t know, a peacenik?
PERRY JEFFERIES: No, not at all.
PERRY JEFFERIES: I love this country. I think we need a strong defense. In a perfect world, sure, nobody would fight. Nobody would want to invade our land or take over our ideals or force their way of life on us. But that’s not how the world is. And so the only way that we can maintain our way of life is to have a strong defense and to be ready to defend that when need be. To do that we need an accomplished army. Well trained. Well resourced. With all the things they need to do what they do. And we had that before we started this little adventure here. Now we’re beginning to eat it up and chew it up. The equipment and the people are getting chewed up and spat out. And that’s not the right way to defend our country.
BRANCACCIO: I was reading Reuters this week and I saw a quote from a Vietnam vet over at the VFW convention. And he thought that Cindy Sheehan can’t have it both ways. You can’t be against the war and for the troops. What are your thoughts on that?
PERRY JEFFERIES: Oh, I don’t think that’s right at all. I tell you I was in Iraq and we saw some of the peace protests that were done at that time. And I felt like people really cared about me because they were taking the time to address the issues. And get really involved and do something rather than just emit jingoistic slogans.
BRANCACCIO: And you’re not concerned that it somehow dishonors people who are working so hard over there, putting their lives at risk, when people question the policy there?
PERRY JEFFERIES: No, I think that’s why our people– that’s why our young men and women all are working over there. So that people can express that opinion. And we want that for the Iraqi people and we want to make sure we maintain that for us here too.
BRANCACCIO: Now the President of the United States said this week that the best way to honor people who are serving there, as well as those who have served, like yourself, is to stay the course and get the job done. What’s your reaction?
PERRY JEFFERIES: Well, I think what he’s done is he’s tried to set up a straw man and say that people there are advocating an absolute pullout.
BRANCACCIO: An immediate withdrawal?
PERRY JEFFERIES: Right. I don’t think that’s reasonable now. And I think that Mrs. Sheehan’s question is ‘what noble cause?’ And I think that’s an issue that needs to be addressed. And we accomplished all of the objectives that we said that we were going to Iraq for. So for what reason are we staying? Everybody talks about this course and winning. But no one can define it. And until we identify that problem and assess what we have to do to accomplish the goal. Our men and women are just idling in the kill zone. They’re just killing time over there.
So we need to figure out what we’re doing there, make sure the American public agrees to do that, and will make the sacrifices necessary, and to give our men and women on the ground the resources they need. And when they come home then we need to make sure that they are taken care of properly.
BRANCACCIO: You’re saying the resources they need. But also what? A more clearly defined strategy? That’s what you’re asking for?
PERRY JEFFERIES: Exactly. There seems to be no real mission right now. We keep talking about winning and fighting terrorists. But terrorism is a technique. You can’t win against terrorism. We’ve talked about turning it over to the Iraqi Army and we’ve talked about the constitutional process. The original reasons that were given to the public are obviously not true.
But the fact is we got about 140,000 of America’s best and brightest sitting in the desert and just sort of standing in a kill zone, waiting for something to happen so that they can react to it. They’re working hard. At the company level, each and every day they’re doing their little projects. They’re making schools. They’re building roads. But that’s not why we sent them there. That’s not why we’re spending that money. So we need to tell them what the goal is, what they have to achieve. The military will make a plan to accomplish that and you can get those people home.
BRANCACCIO: What about just the goal establishing political stability in Iraq? I mean that’s ostensibly what’s going on. That’s what we’re waiting for?
PERRY JEFFERIES: Well, that’s what they’re saying but that’s an awful amorphous goal. You can’t define that in metrics. Mr. Rumsfeld, the civilian head of the Pentagon right now, he comes from a corporate world where everything is measured. And every night our commanders in Iraq have to submit all kinds of data, reams of data and numbers to what they call a battle update brief. Where they keep track of what they’ve done that day. And yet there seems to be no metric that defines our success. And the only numbers we hear are changed constantly. How many Iraqi troops are trained. How many schools are built. How many soldiers are coming or going. We have the generals saying one thing. The civilian leadership saying another. And none it seems to make any sense. We need a hard and fast goal. [“Now Transcript - August 26, 2005″ (PBS)]
Jefferies is obviously someone who’s lived it and put a lot of thought into what needs to be done. We need more people like him — people who see the big picture and don’t focus on knee-jerk reactions of “us” vs. “them”.
The following is from the Star Tribune in the Letters from readers section:
As a U.S. Marine currently deployed to Iraq, I would like to respectfully disagree with a fellow Minnesotan who stated that people who protest the war hurt troops’ morale (”Letters from readers,” Aug. 26).
Public debate and discussion are vital to the health of a democracy. It is a good thing when I see Americans exercising their right of freedom of speech.
Seeing people exercise freedoms that many in other countries don’t have is something that we all should be thankful for — whether you agree with what is being said or not. Semper Fidelis!
James Haugerud,
Camp Blue Diamond,
Ar Ramadi, Iraq. [“What Is He Fighting For?” (Star Tribune)]
Yay for Haugerud for realizing that our right to protest is what he’s a defender of. We can’t sacrifice our own freedoms in the name of bringing freedom to other countries. That’s extremely hypocritical.
And these quotes are from an article in The Pensacola News:
If there’s growing sentiment against the war in Iraq, many area veterans of the fight aren’t taking it personally.
Vets see the opposition as a protest against policy, not them or their service.[“Vets see protests as attack on policy” (The Pensacola News)]
“I have run into people who don’t support the president’s views on Iraq or our objectives, but I haven’t run into a single person who said (he or she) doesn’t support the troops,” said Jason Crawford, a Purple Heart recipient who was shot in the face by opposition forces in December 2003 while in Iraq. “I think our society learned from Vietnam that it’s not the men and women who sacrifice their lives and signed on the dotted lines who make up the plans and objectives. I think pretty much everyone supports the troops.”
That’s even if they don’t approve of the U.S. involvement in Iraq that began in March 2003. [“Vets see protests as attack on policy” (The Pensacola News)]
Finally someone who gets that you can support your troops while disapproving of the Commander -in-Chief and his minions.
Army Reserves Lt. Col. Alice Bell, 46, who spent 10 months in Kuwait in support of the Iraq invasion, said she has heard nothing but praise since returning home.
“It’s not like in Vietnam, when they spat on troops coming back,” she said. “Some people don’t agree with the mission itself. But even if they’re against the war effort, they’re for the troops. They realize we’re doing what we have to do, what we’ve been ordered to do, whether we agree with it or not.” [“Vets see protests as attack on policy “(The Pensacola News)]
But Crawford and others believe there would be fewer protests and more support for military operations in Iraq if Americans had a clearer picture of what’s going on there.
[“Vets see protests as attack on policy” (The Pensacola News)]
That last one is so true. Maybe if Americans felt that the Administration was more upfront with them, maybe if the Administration answered some of the publics questions with real answers instead of slogans and rhetoric, maybe if more time was spent explaining the productive efforts of the troops and not just the fighting part, maybe there would be fewer protestors.
Hat tip to The Green Knight and Shakespeare’s Sister.
tags: Iraq, anti-war, protest, American soldiers, Support the Troops
You may also enjoy...
2 comments
Leave a comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
on August 30, 2005 at 9:19 pm
Big Dog said:
Very interesting post. I do not know of anyone who said all the troops support the war. I think that about 80-90% have that opinion and the fact that reenlistment in many units is greater than 100% of their goal is an indication that an overwhelming majority feels it is right. Troops are allowed to have an opinion on the war. They however are not free to protest it or decide they do not weant to go. The discipline necessary for effective operations forbids that.
The First Sergeant made some interesting points. This First Sergeant (yes, me) does not agree with some of his assessments. I believe that terrorism can be fought and defeated. I believe that a unilateral pull out will throw Iraq into a civil war and that we need to train more of their people so that stability can be maintained when we leave.
I do not believe Cindy Sheehan or any other protestor is a bad person because they are anti war and are protesting. Our country is a great one because we allow it. Her motivations and the way she callously uses her dead son sicken me. The fact that she is backed by people who have very big political agendas does not give much creedence to her stance as far as I am concerned. I might not agree with her but I would give my life defending her right to say it. Much more than I could expect from a woman who said this country is not worth fighting for.
I have many friends and co-workers who are against Bush and do not care for him or most other republicans. I believe they are entitled to that and we coexist peacefully because we are a nation that honors those freedoms. However, it is quite interesting that for a lot of the left free speech is only allowed if you say what they want to hear.
I have my own opinion on whether you can support the troops and not the war. I will ask what Rush did. If someone said they supported the war but not the troops fighting it, would you believe that is possible to do?
From 1/05- 87%% say they’re satisfied with their jobs and, if given the choice today, only 25% say they’d leave the service. Military Times Poll
USA Today May 2005
on August 30, 2005 at 9:52 pm
n. mallory said:
Once again, I must say that the same can be said of the right’s version of free speech. In fact, many on the right, won’t even pretend to hear if it doesn’t agree with their set of things they will believe.
As for “supporting the war, but not the troops,” that’s an interesting thought but it’s not the same. For example, I can support the troops — respect that they are brave, courageous, and hard workers, respect their willingness to put their lives on the line to do what they’ve been told to do. However, the fact is, as you pointed out, they don’t have a say in what they are told to do; they are expected to do whatever they are ordered unquestioningly. Therefore, I can respect and support the troops, but disagree with what their commanding officer has ordered them to do.
See, at least when my boss tells me to do something, I have the choice of doing it or finding another job. The troops don’t have that choice…and maybe they do agree with their orders, that’s fine. I don’t have to agree to understand that they are doing their duty, serving their country by following their orders.
I loved my cousin who served in the first Gulf War. I sent him care packages, etc. I do the same now to strangers. If my friend D gets sent, I’ll do the same for him. I come from a military family and I respect the people who serve because I know I couldn’t do it (though I entertained the idea of the Air Force or the Marines at various points in my younger years).
Anyway, my point is that we all have our own opinions, including those in the military.